2008 (12) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A.K. Mohiddin, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal challenges a penalty of Rs. 3 lakhs imposed on the appellants M/s. Metco Roof Private Limited under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (CER). 2. Heard both sides. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellants classified the goods roofing sheets of steel and purlins during 1-3-2004 to 28-2-2005 under Chap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tricted the demand applicable to the normal period. Accordingly he also dropped the proposal to impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Act and imposed the impugned penalty under Rule 25 of the CER. 4. I find that classification of the impugned goods was in dispute and different Benches of this Tribunal had held different views on the issue. The dispute was finally resolved by a decision ....